Proposed rules for robots and AI in Europe include a push for a general basic income for humans, and ‘human rights’ for robotsA Tanscorp UU smart robot is displayed at CES 2017 at the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas.A Tanscorp UU smart robot is displayed at CES 2017 at the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas. Photograph: Ethan Miller/Getty

The European parliament has urged the drafting of a set of regulations to govern the use and creation of robots and artificial intelligence, including a form of “electronic personhood” to ensure rights and responsibilities for the most capable AI.

In a 17-2 vote, with two abstentions, the parliament’s legal affairs committee passed the report, which outlines one possible framework for regulation.

“A growing number of areas of our daily lives are increasingly affected by robotics,” said the report’s author, Luxembourgish MEP Mady Delvaux. “In order to address this reality and to ensure that robots are and will remain in the service of humans, we urgently need to create a robust European legal framework”.

The proposed legal status for robots would be analogous to corporate personhood, which allows firms to take part in legal cases both as the plaintiff and respondent. “It is similar to what we now have for companies, but it is not for tomorrow,” said Delvaux. “What we need now is to create a legal framework for the robots that are currently on the market or will become available over the next 10 to 15 years.”

The broad report identifies a number of areas in need of specific oversight from the European Union, including:

The creation of a European agency for robotics and AI; A legal definition of “smart autonomous robots”, with a system of registration of the most advanced of them; An advisory code of conduct for robotics engineers aimed at guiding the ethical design, production and use of robots; A new reporting structure for companies requiring them to report the contribution of robotics and AI to the economic results of a company for the purpose of taxation and social security contributions A new mandatory insurance scheme for companies to cover damage caused by their robots.

The report also takes special interest in the future of autonomous vehicles, arguing that self-driving cars are “in most urgent need of European and global rules”. “Fragmented regulatory approaches would hinder implementation and jeopardise European competitiveness,” it continues.AdvertisementinRead invented by TeadsAdvertisement

It also addresses the risk that overly competitive robots could result in large-scale unemployment, and calls for the “serious” examination of a general basic income as one possible solution.

Ashley Morgan, of international legal practice Osborne Clarke, says that the proposals will be “extremely controversial.”

“One could argue that, effectively, a law of the nature proposed in this resolution would grant human rights to robots. That’s not going to go down easy with companies that are creating robots and AIs,” he told the Guardian.

“If I create a robot, and that robot creates something that could be patented, should I own that patent or should the robot? If I sell the robot, should the intellectual property it has developed go with it? These are not easy questions to answer, and that goes right to the heart of this debate,” Morgan added.

The full house of the European Parliament will vote on the draft proposals in February, which will need to be approved by absolute majority.

I hope my Roomba doesn't demand the minimum wage.

(And believe me, "European competitiveness" will not be improved by the antics of these bozos).

_________________“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti

Proposed rules for robots and AI in Europe include a push for a general basic income for humans, and ‘human rights’ for robotsA Tanscorp UU smart robot is displayed at CES 2017 at the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas.A Tanscorp UU smart robot is displayed at CES 2017 at the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas. Photograph: Ethan Miller/Getty

The European parliament has urged the drafting of a set of regulations to govern the use and creation of robots and artificial intelligence, including a form of “electronic personhood” to ensure rights and responsibilities for the most capable AI.

In a 17-2 vote, with two abstentions, the parliament’s legal affairs committee passed the report, which outlines one possible framework for regulation.

“A growing number of areas of our daily lives are increasingly affected by robotics,” said the report’s author, Luxembourgish MEP Mady Delvaux. “In order to address this reality and to ensure that robots are and will remain in the service of humans, we urgently need to create a robust European legal framework”.

The proposed legal status for robots would be analogous to corporate personhood, which allows firms to take part in legal cases both as the plaintiff and respondent. “It is similar to what we now have for companies, but it is not for tomorrow,” said Delvaux. “What we need now is to create a legal framework for the robots that are currently on the market or will become available over the next 10 to 15 years.”

The broad report identifies a number of areas in need of specific oversight from the European Union, including:

The creation of a European agency for robotics and AI; A legal definition of “smart autonomous robots”, with a system of registration of the most advanced of them; An advisory code of conduct for robotics engineers aimed at guiding the ethical design, production and use of robots; A new reporting structure for companies requiring them to report the contribution of robotics and AI to the economic results of a company for the purpose of taxation and social security contributions A new mandatory insurance scheme for companies to cover damage caused by their robots.

The report also takes special interest in the future of autonomous vehicles, arguing that self-driving cars are “in most urgent need of European and global rules”. “Fragmented regulatory approaches would hinder implementation and jeopardise European competitiveness,” it continues.AdvertisementinRead invented by TeadsAdvertisement

It also addresses the risk that overly competitive robots could result in large-scale unemployment, and calls for the “serious” examination of a general basic income as one possible solution.

Ashley Morgan, of international legal practice Osborne Clarke, says that the proposals will be “extremely controversial.”

“One could argue that, effectively, a law of the nature proposed in this resolution would grant human rights to robots. That’s not going to go down easy with companies that are creating robots and AIs,” he told the Guardian.

“If I create a robot, and that robot creates something that could be patented, should I own that patent or should the robot? If I sell the robot, should the intellectual property it has developed go with it? These are not easy questions to answer, and that goes right to the heart of this debate,” Morgan added.

The full house of the European Parliament will vote on the draft proposals in February, which will need to be approved by absolute majority.

I hope my Roomba doesn't demand the minimum wage.

(And believe me, "European competitiveness" will not be improved by the antics of these bozos).

Going back and reading the content of the post (instead of just having a laugh at the tag line) . . . actually doesn't sound like a terrible set of considerations for policy makers to be considering, though I agree it is not likely to help "European competitiveness."

Had policy makers managed to anticipate the Windows revolution and act premptively to prevent Gates from achieving the enormous success which eventually led him into that period of spending lots of time in anti-trust court rooms, we likely would not be where we are today with respect to personal computers, and quite possibly a wide range of other technologies which were promoted by the 1990s revolution in personal computers.

It is not as easy to take a "let the genie out of the bottle first and THEN worry about regulating it" attitude with "robots" but it probably is the "better" approach, at least as far as producing wealth and improvement in the human condition.

_________________Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?

With sufficient time and effort I can create an app that will pass the Turing test, as if that was somehow some form of ultimate threshold or so.

Essentially, a very simple state machine with complex mechanics for choosing appropriate response from a large enough tree and the capability to tap into online databases and online searches would eventually pass for a sentient thing by that criteria.

Yet I can see exactly how it is NOT sentient or a person. It's a fricking dial box.

That you can make it a more complex dial box doesn't automatically result in it being sentient or a person.

People can fall prey to stupid prejudice. For instance the video of a robot trying to maintain balance and a person testing the balance algorithm and systems by kicking the robot upset a lot of people who thought the robot was a person and was being bullied.

It comes as no surprise that EU is not above that level of idiocy.

This reminds me of the idiots who think they can achieve immortality by "uploading their consciousness to a cloud". What a crock of horseshit.

_________________All scientists across the world work for US Democratic Party

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum